Anything on HDDs yields suboptimal performance.
> On Feb 4, 2024, at 13:42, Niklas Hambüchen <m...@nh2.me> wrote: > > https://docs.ceph.com/en/reef/cephfs/createfs/ says: > >> The data pool used to create the file system is the “default” data pool and >> the location for storing all inode backtrace information, which is used for >> hard link management and disaster recovery. >> For this reason, all CephFS inodes have at least one object in the default >> data pool. If erasure-coded pools are planned for file system data, it is >> best to configure the default as a replicated pool to improve small-object >> write and read performance when updating backtraces. > > This poses the question: > > Are normal replicated CephFS installations (metadata on SSDs, data on HDDs) > set up with suboptimal performance because they don't do this? > > If having inodes/backtraces on replicated instead of EC improves performance, > shouldn't one expect that putting inodes/backtraces on SSD would improve it > even more? > > From the docs I also cannot really conclude when inotes/backtraces become > important. > Is that all the time, or only sometimes? > > Thanks! > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io > To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
